Editorial. BOOKMAKERS AND SWEEPS

Taranaki Daily News, 21 August 1930, Page 5

Editorial. BOOKMAKERS AND SWEEPS

■a.,*-, In the midst of the outcry against art unions and the gaol- • ing and fining of bookmakers-comes the voice of one crying in .the wilderness, or chaos, or whatever one may call , the pi esent topsy-turvey state of affairs in regard to gambling in New Zealand—a correspondent urging that the reign of . Yes-No hypocrisy be ended, and offering suggestions which are logical, • if not likely to be adopted. .

' - That betting is a crime in the eyes of the law unless coni' ducted through the. totalisator, and; that the sending of money - to sweepstake promoters (either in New Zealand, Tasmania.’ Sydney, or elsewhere) is illegal, while permission is granted to conduct art unions from one end of the Dominion to the other, ■ are admitted facts. But the law is bne-eyed. Gambling, is eitnei i'' good or bad—it is a matter of opinion which adjective is., used—and hence it is that public .opinion does not regard as criminal - either betting with bookmakers or the sending of money to outside “consultations,” But the law .says that they are criminal, : : and the law imposes severe punishment on offenders. . J ■ ‘On these subjects an Qld and valued correspondent writes: • “I suggest that it would be > a great help to all if bookmakers were licensed under Government supervision. You know that last time they-were licensed anyone could get a license. CrimInals, burglars—it made no difference, the. Act being worded in ; such a way that racing clubs had no option in the matter. 1 maintain that with proper Tattersail’s sweeps, conducted on ■ 1 Tasmanian lines, say on the Auckland Cup and other big races, , the petrol tax. could be dropped, and bookmaking under Government control would also help the Government.’ .■iPresumably the correspondent refers to the betting tax,as •: collected from bookmakers .licensed in several Australian States. He continues: “I honestly think that a good ring could be established, though it might not be possible to back a horse here for as much money as could be obtained in Australia. But I know that there are just as good men bookmaking in New Zealand as there are in Australia, and why should bookmaking be a crime here, and not elsewhere ?” The correspondent proceeds to doubt the honesty of lawmakers and some persons high up in New Zealand racing affairs when “they themselves are not above going to Sydney to exploit the betting market there.” Possibly there is something m this contention; but the law is different in New South Wales, and prominent New Zealand horseowners, several of whom come under the above category, cannot be blamed for patronising the best betting market. Racing is a business. It is a costly one, too, and must be made to pay, if possible. Stakes, outside the big centres, are small on the other side of the Tasman, and betting must necessarily be on a larger scale than in. New Zealand to make racing profitable. Quite recently the writer read in a New Zealand paper of the secretary of a New Zealand Racing .Club who told an interviewer that when in Sydney he had had a good day at the races there, having backed so-and-so at 4 s and something else at “s’s.” He was not guilty of an illegal act, but followed the axiom: “When in Rome do as Rome does. Still he could not have had any animosity to the bookmaking fra- . ternity 'personally, or to their business as a whole. ■" There are always two-sides to a question, and, as this writer - has said more than once, th© sound &nd honest bookmakers did not get a fair “spin” when last licensed in New Zealand. The law did not give the bookmakers’ association the powers to inquire into the bona tides of applicants for licenses. The racing clubs could hot refuse to license for the day (or the meeting) any person who could produce the license fees, £l5 or £2O for the lawn, and sometimes less for the “outer.” And the result was, as my correspondent points out, that “criminals, burglars, etc.,” put on the bag and. bawled the odds, and in many instances left their clients lamenting. That much revenue is lost to. the Government at present is undoubted, and possibly there is a good deal of sense in our correspondent’s argument that taxation might be reduced if the “leakages” were stopped. ' . ' ■ —“Paritutu.”